Michael Leroy Waite v. Florida

A prosecutor filed an information charging Waite with unlawful interception of a phone conversation and certified that she had received sworn witness testimony. The information did not set out that testimony. A circuit court clerk issued a capias for Waite’s arrest under a statute directing its issuance without leave or order of court. A judge signed the bail endorsement on the capias after a detective told him the facts of the case. At the suppression hearing, the detective’s account identified neither the facts he conveyed nor an oath supporting his presentation to the judge. The Circuit Court upheld the capias as a warrant based on sworn probable cause. The District Court of Appeal later reversed the oral interception convictions because the deputies lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the calls. The judgment now under review affirmed denial of postconviction relief from the surviving convictions after the interception counts were dismissed. The question presented is: Whether the capias procedure used to order Waite from the curtilage of his home and arrest him satisfied the Fourth Amendment’s requirement for a neutral and detached official to independently determine probable cause.